Reacting to the decision by the High Court that MPs' expenses must be published, the Prime Minister spoke of his concerns for the security issues associated with publishing MPs' addresses. To the sundry charges levelled at Gordon Brown in recent months, we must now add hypocrisy.

Many other people wish to keep their addresses private for security reasons. Among these are medical researchers working with animals, victims of child or domestic abuse, witnesses to crimes and police officers.

To protect their privacy, such people, along with many others, often choose not to have their names listed in the publicly available electoral roll and opt for ex-directory phone numbers.

Other privacy-enhancing measures can be taken. For example, medical researchers are often advised not to use their own addresses for contact with various government agencies after DVLA officials passed on names and addresses to animal rights extremists.

Yet despite apparently understanding the legitimate need for people to maintain their privacy, the Prime Minister insists on going ahead with building a national identity register, containing the names and addresses - and much else besides - of every resident. And it is the government's stated aim to make life as inconvenient as possible for those who do not comply with reporting requirements, in addition to the hefty fines.

Compilation of a national population register has been a long-standing obsession of the British government; one that historically has always been unpopular with the public. Gordon Brown would do well to dwell on what happened last time the government attempted it. Margaret Thatcher probably regrets her introduction of the poll tax.

Geraint Bevan, 3e Grovepark Gardens, Glasgow.